Nuclear Power Radiation — Part 1

Radiation from Normal Nuclear Facility Operations, Waste, and Misc...

Recently, I posted a commentary arguing that there are good reasons to categorize Nuclear power as a “renewable” source of electrical energy.

One reader said OK, but what about the radiation problem? My answer is what radiation problem? I’ll break down this technical matter into two parts, and try to keep it understandable to non-scientists.

Part 1 will outline radiation from normal nuclear power operations, waste, and misc... Part 2 will discuss radiation from nuclear power: a) accidents, b) man-made disasters, and c) natural disasters.

The short answer is that the nuclear power radiation issue is a manufactured concern by scientifically ignorant and/or dishonest people. Consider the following…

1 - Nuclear Power Normal Operations

The whole business of radiation harm has been wildly exaggerated by self-serving parties, taking advantage of a technically challenged American public. When radiation concern is expressed about a nearby nuclear facility, we need to keep things in perspective. Living near an operating nuclear facility exposes neighbors to minuscule radiation, particularly when compared to other sources. Here is EPA information:

The reality is that we are bombarded with radiation continually from the sun, ground, flying, food, medical procedures (e.g., dental x-rays), etc. For example, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has posted this food comparison:

2 - Nuclear Power Waste = Reprocessable Fuel

If we are so concerned about nuclear radiation, why are we purposefully generating considerably more radioactive waste than there needs to be?

Fact 1 is that nuclear waste is actually re-usable fuel. Fact 2 is that the US is the only country in the world (TY President Carter) that prohibits US nuclear facilities from reprocessing nuclear waste. Fact 3 is that if nuclear fuel was reprocessed, we would end up having much less nuclear waste. Therefore, if we are so concerned about radioactive nuclear waste, why have we made it illegal for it to be reduced???

3 - Nuclear Power Radioactive Waste Storage

An enormous amount of scientific research went into selecting the Yucca Mountain (Nevada) site for storing nuclear waste, and then designing it to be extraordinarily safe. For example, nuclear waste there would be stored roughly 1000 feet below ground. For example, the closest that people live to Yucca Mountain is about 30 miles.

However, this was politically derailed by uneducated alarmists.

The net effect of their actions is that all current radioactive waste in some 93 US nuclear facilities is stored on-site, and above ground. In what universe are 93 different storage sites, above ground, and relatively near populations, a safer alternative???

4 - Low Dose Radiation is Beneficial

Again, the scientific truth has not been publicized by the media. Consider this study. It says: “Health impacts of low-dose ionizing radiation are significant in important fields such as X-ray imaging, radiation therapy, nuclear power, and others. However, all existing and potential applications are currently challenged by public concerns and regulatory restrictions. We aimed to assess the validity of the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model of radiation damage, which is the basis of current regulation, and to assess the justification for this regulation… LNT has not been proven to be true… so there is little doubt that the present regulatory burden should be reduced.”

Here is a good short video on this that most people will understand.

5 - Wind Energy and Radioactive Waste

A relatively unpublicized wind energy fact is that an enormous amount of environmental pollution is generated in processing the substantial amounts of rare earth metals needed for wind turbines. Most of this is done in China, so it is hidden from view. But the main proponents of wind energy are all about saving the planet, so why wouldn’t they care about environmental destruction in every country?

Surprisingly, a large amount of radioactive waste is also a by-product. An interesting calculation concludes that over a twenty-year period (the supposed life of wind turbines), there is likely more radioactive waste resulting from wind turbine manufacture, than there is in an equivalent amount of nuclear power generated!

Since this involves some technical calculations, I’ll save them for another commentary: Wind Energy and Radioactive Waste.

Takeaway —

The clear message above is that the nuclear radiation scare is largely a boogeyman generated by anti-Americans who would like us to shoot ourselves in the foot.

This situation also exposes the hypocrisy of climate alarmists who say things like we are on the verge of global climate catastrophe, so we need to do everything possible to avert this — yet they are opposed to a major, proven CO2 free operating energy source! This is yet another example of what happens when political science replaces Real Science.

---

Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2023 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time - but why would you?

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about once a week).